Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: Hon. D. Coulter.

Introductions by Members

H. Yao: I want to take this opportunity to wish Tanya Slater, a Richmond firefighter, a happy birthday. I do believe she has requested, for her birthday wish, a 24-hour shift.

I ask all in the chamber to join with me in wishing her a happy birthday.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Today we’re honoured to have in the gallery Ron MacDonald, the chief civilian director of the independent investigations office of British Columbia.

The independent investigations office plays a vital role in upholding accountability and transparency with our law enforcement agencies. With a commitment to impartiality and thoroughness, the IIO investigates incidents involving police officers that result in serious harm or death. That relationship between law enforcement and our communities is of paramount importance, and the work of the IIO ensures that justice is served and public trust is maintained.

[10:05 a.m.]

Would the House please join me in making Ron very welcome today.

R. Merrifield: Today I have the privilege of introducing a very special guest to this chamber, my first-born son, Mikhail Wasylyk, or to those who know him, Mik. At 26 years old — that’s right, I had him when I was 12; just joking — and 6 foot 6, he stands as a testament to curiosity and ambition, an engineer by profession but forever the inquisitive child at heart.

Mik’s presence here today absolutely fills my heart with joy. It’s like my two worlds get to collide. But it’s he who fills our spirits with hope for the next generation.

He’s always been a source of inspiration for me, reminding me of the importance of our work here in the chamber to foster an environment where curiosity breeds innovation, where integrity paves the way for progress and where change is always possible. Even as a young child he never accepted anything without doing his own investigation. He was the kid who said “why” of everything, but he was also the best big brother to his sister and brother.

Mik’s journey fills me with pride and hope. He daily challenges me with all of his text messages — yes, every last one of them — but especially lunch dates that he spends time with me in. He also inspires me to do my best in building a society that can create space for the next generations’ dreams and hopes.

They say that you love each child equally, and you do, but for different reasons. I love my Mik or Meschuck because he was the first to give me the best job in the entire world, being a mom.

I’m so happy that you’re here today, Mik.

Would the House please join me in welcoming him.

Hon. H. Bains: I’m really happy today to introduce to this House my administrative coordinator Samantha Newcombe, who is in the House today along with her father, Dave Newcombe. He’s here to watch the question period today from the gallery.

Mr. Newcombe is a longtime New Democrat. He is cele­brating his retirement after 26 years with the Hospital Employees Union. On behalf of his daughter, my administrative coordinator Samantha, she’d like to thank him for teaching her the values of hard work and advocating for workers’ rights.

Please join with me and give both of them a very, very warm welcome.

J. Rustad: In the gallery today, we have the Conservative Party of British Columbia’s candidate for Courtenay-Comox, Damon Scrase. Damon is a hard-working fisherman from Courtenay, born in Comox. He is an everyday, hard-working British Columbian who put his name forward to represent his home community and make change for British Columbia.

Would the House please make him welcome.

Hon. R. Kahlon: I want to recognize two individuals on behalf of our caucus.

First, Alissa Brandt, who is our executive director. This is her last day with us. She is one of the lucky ones. She’s got a lovely, beautiful grandchild in Manitoba, and she gets the opportunity now to move back to Manitoba to be closer to her family, closer to her grandchild. My dad used to say there’s principal, and then there’s interest. She gets to now enjoy the interest.

We’re going to miss her. She’s been instrumental in the work that we do. She has supported all of our caucus members through good times, through challenging times. We really appreciate the work that she’s done on behalf of caucus, so I want to recognize her. She’s probably in the other room, watching.

Alissa, we are going to really miss you, but I know that the folks in Manitoba are going to gain a really, really big asset that will support them as well.

Will the House please thank Alissa for the work that she’s done for British Columbia.

Now, we always thank the amazing people that make this House function, but there are some other folks that help make this House function that rarely get recognized.

[10:10 a.m.]

Today I’m losing somebody who is very important in my team, somebody who works very well with the teams here, who works well with Ms. P., who works well with Laura from our Green caucus, with Hannah from the B.C. Conservatives. It’s Will Maartman.

Will Maartman keeps the House going. While we sit in this House and jostle and discuss issues, people like Will, people like Ms. P, people like Laura, Hannah…. They all work together behind the scenes to make sure that this House continues to function.

Will is an amazing individual. He started working for the caucus as a receptionist. He’s done pretty much every single role that you can in our caucus to now leading and making sure that the legislative agenda continues to go through. Today is his last day working with my team.

I know, on behalf of the Solicitor General who worked with him for many, many years…. He shared many stories. I don’t think I should share them all and put them on Hansard, but on behalf of all of us, I want to say thank you for the work he’s done and congratulate him, as he’s now the new executive director for the NDP caucus.

I want to say thank you to Will. Enjoy your new role. We’re going to miss you on this side.

Please, can the House join me in thanking him for the work he’s done.

Hon. G. Lore: I have two sets of introductions to make.

First, I’d like to welcome Katisha Paul, Soh and Alana Reeve to the House. I’m incredibly grateful that they’re joining today. They’re here for an important and exciting announcement that we have later today.

Katisha Paul is the elected UBCIC youth rep. I’ve had the opportunity to connect with her, and I’m very grateful for that connection and a chance to listen and learn. I’m really grateful to be doing this work together and to continue to work alongside her.

Soh is a member of the provincial director of child welfare’s Youth Advisory Council. They have just completed their first year on the YAC and are starting their second.

The Youth Advisory Council is a really important group that helps inform the work that the ministry does. Alana Reeve is a Youth Advisory Council mental health clinician.

Will the House please join me in making all three of these individuals very welcome in this House.

D. Routley: After 19 years in this House, I can say to everyone, and they all know this is true, that our constituency assistants are the backbone of our service to our community. They are the front-facing presence in our office. They take in so many difficult and challenging casework issues.

I once saw a cartoon of someone blindfolded with a dart, about to throw it at a wall with tons of labels: transportation, education, health care. The caption said: “Today I’m an expert in….” That’s what CAs are. They have to have relationships throughout government and be able to solve problems, and we are the beneficiaries of their great work. I am pleased today to have the two great CAs from my community, Sarah Miller and Pamela Cooling, in the House as my guests today.

Yesterday I made a statement where I made a joke about an aging hospital being ravaged and worn by time. My friend from Surrey-Cloverdale reminded me I may be speaking about myself. In that statement, I also spoke about a progressive council, North Cowichan, which is partnering with the Cowichan Hospital project to advance housing needs along with that project.

One of those progressive councillors, a previous Green Party candidate, Chris Istace, is also here as a guest.

Those failing, aging eyes don’t permit me to recognize the fourth person who is with them, but I would like the House to help me welcome all of these fine people from my constituency.

The Speaker: The Minister of Children and Family Development, one more introduction.

Hon. G. Lore: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the second opportunity.

Also joining us in the gallery today are my aunt and uncle. Sandy and Shelley Cotton are here, and I’m grateful to have them join us today. They live in Victoria, and my community benefits from these two wonderful individuals, who moved here in the last few years and bring with them their deep commitment to community.

[10:15 a.m.]

My uncle Sandy is a decorated veteran and an ordained deacon in the Anglican Church. He was a professor at Queen’s. My auntie Shelley changed countless lives over the decades as a teacher. They’re both, as I said, deeply committed to community as volunteers, and are deeply committed to their children and six granddaughters as well.

Will the House please join me in making them welcome as well.

I. Paton: I would just like today to send out congratulations to Tsawwassen First Nation. Yesterday was the 15th anniversary of their treaty. They’re doing some wonderful things out there, certainly adding to our housing stock in Delta. They’re part of my Delta South riding.

Congratulations to Chief Laura Cassidy, my good friend Bryce Williams and all their executive council.

Please, everyone, congratulations on the 15th anniversary of Tsawwassen First Nation’s treaty.

M. Elmore: It’s my little sister’s birthday tomorrow, so I would ask everybody in the Legislature to please wish her, Lolita Elmore, a very happy birthday.

Introduction and
First Reading of Bills

BILL 17 — POLICE AMENDMENT ACT, 2024

Hon. M. Farnworth presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Police Amendment Act, 2024.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

I’m pleased to introduce Bill 17, the Police Amendment Act, 2024. This bill is the first step towards making systematic improvements to the policing and public safety landscape in B.C.

The bill addresses three recommendations of the 2022 Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act, seven recommendations from the 2019 Special Committee to Review the Police Complaint Process and legislative changes requested by the Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner and the Ombudsperson.

The legislation makes changes to municipal police governance, oversight and police superintendence, including allowing local governments to determine who their representative will be on their police board and will allow members of the police board to elect their chair and vice-chair.

This bill will also allow the Police Complaint Commissioner to call a public hearing earlier in misconduct investigations and improves the commissioner’s authority to conduct systemic reviews and investigations into the causes of and contributors to police complaints.

The Speaker: The question is first reading of the bill.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 17, Police Amendment Act, 2024, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Speaker’s Statement

NON-PARTISAN STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS

The Speaker: Members, before we start two-minute statements today, I just want to remind all members that the two-minute statement should be very non-partisan. In the last couple of days we have noted that some statements were not very neutral, so please keep that in mind when you are speaking and celebrating or recognizing people when you are making two-minute statements.

Statements
(Standing Order 25B)

QINGMING FESTIVAL

T. Wat: As the MLA for Richmond North Centre and on behalf of the B.C. United official opposition, I rise to recognize the Qingming festival, a profound tradition within our Chinese communities.

Qingming, or Tomb Sweeping Day, observed shortly after the spring equinox, is a time when families across British Columbia unite to honour their ancestors, reflecting on the legacies that shape our society.

This is a time for me personally to remember and reconnect with my beloved parents, my very dear husband and my only sister in the world, reliving all our fond memories when we are all together as a loving family.

[10:20 a.m.]

This festival embodies our connection to the past, allowing us to commemorate those who came before us. It’s a day of remembrance, gratitude and renewal, inviting us to look back with respect and forward with hope.

In this moment, let’s also remember the early Chinese settlers of British Columbia, whose resilience and contributions are an integral part of our province’s rich mosaic. Their spirit and hard work continue to inspire us, reminding us of the strength found in diversity and the importance of honouring our shared history. It is a legacy that reminds us of the importance of inclusion, respect and understanding across all communities that call British Columbia our home.

Today I urge all British Columbians to embrace the spirit of Qingming, recognizing the deep roots and enduring bonds that unite us. Let us move forward committed to building a province marked by understanding, respect and unity.

SIKH HERITAGE MONTH
AND HISTORY OF SIKHS IN B.C.

A. Singh: Since 2017, April has been marked as Sikh Heritage Month in British Columbia to honour the invaluable contributions Sikhs have made to our province over the last century.

When the first Sikhs arrived in Canada, they were part of the army regiment stationed in Hong Kong. They travelled by train through Canada in commemoration of Queen Victoria’s Diamond Jubilee in 1897.

I find this fact über-interesting. As you know, I also hail from Hong Kong. Until the mid-’90s, the last Sikh regiment in the British Army was still stationed at Stonecutters Island in Hong Kong. Our uncle, who also moved from Hong Kong to British Columbia and lives in Coquitlam, Thirath Singh, was one of the last commanders of that unit.

Following this initial visit, a second contingent of Punjabi soldiers visited B.C. in celebration of the coronation of King Edward VII in 1902. They arrived in Victoria on the Empress of Japan on June 3, 1902, and their reception was not unwelcoming. Local papers exclaimed: “Turbaned Men Excite Interest: Awe-inspiring Men from India Held the Crowds.”

That changed very quickly as permanent immigration started shortly after with the establishment of a gurdwara in Golden and then the Khalsa Diwan Society in Vancouver.

The next century or so is a story of struggle and incredible achievements in the face of astounding adversity. Despite being met with discrimination and racism, they built flourishing communities and contributed to the growth of our province. Sikhi has, as one of its central tenets, empathy and caring for others, which translates into a passionate love for social and political justice.

That spiritual guidance guided the community through incredibly hard times. From the struggles surrounding the Komagata Maru to the anti-colonial movement that supported freedom in India, Ireland and many other colonies, the Sikhs of British Columbia showed up in force.

That generosity of spirit created unique, multicultural communities and enterprises like the one created by Mayo Singh in Paldi.

By the way, if you’re ever near Duncan, please go and visit. You’ll see images of school children from all over the world studying and playing together in a time where the norm was extreme racism and segregation.

This month we’re celebrating Vaisakhi all over British Columbia — in Surrey, Vancouver and here in Victoria. I encourage you all to go out and visit.

ORGAN DONATION AND LOGAN BOULET

G. Kyllo: Canadians across the country were heartbroken to hear the news of the Humboldt bus crash on April 6, 2018. Of the 29 bus passengers, 16 tragically lost their lives.

Of those we lost, Broncos defenceman Logan Boulet became a beacon of hope through the decision to donate his organs, helping to save the lives of six people. Logan’s generosity sparked a national conversation about organ donation, inspiring more than 150,000 Canadians to register as donors in the days and weeks that followed. This is known as the Logan Boulet effect.

In remembrance of Logan and in honour of the crash victims and their families, April 7 has been designated as Green Shirt Day. It’s a day for Canadians to unite in memory but also to act, to talk about organ donation and to take the significant step of registering as a donor. It’s crucial to recognize that each organ donor registration is more than a goodwill gesture. It holds the extraordinary power to save up to eight lives, and this potential magnifies the impact that each of us can make.

[10:25 a.m.]

While 90 percent of Canadians endorse organ donation, only 32 percent have formally registered. Despite improvements in donation rates over the past decade, the urgency remains. Every year approximately 250 Canadians lose their lives waiting for a transplant.

On April 7, I encourage everyone to wear a green shirt, to encourage your loved ones to register as organ donors and to consider registering yourself at transplant.bc.ca.

EASTER CELEBRATION EVENTS
IN CAMPBELL RIVER

M. Babchuk: Campbell River was hop, hop, hopping last weekend where hundreds of youngsters and their families participated in the Downtown Campbell River BIA Easter celebration event.

It all started at about 11 a.m. and went through the afternoon. The Easter bunny was alive and well and taking selfies with families all across Robert Ostler Park and enjoying pops and snacks by RE/MAX Check Realty.

Down the street at Spirit Square, we saw the peanut gallery on stage with Shoo Shoo the clown and activities through the square like Bounce-A-Rama castles, cotton candy and snow cones, Gateway Foursquare Church games booth, mini donuts from Canada’s Best Donuts, face painting with Playful Spirit and Magical Faces, the Pretzel Guy, Happy Camper candy and activities courtesy of the city of Campbell River program staff. Food vendors like hot dogs and Sinfully Delicious were also on site.

It was a good time had by all, but I’d like to acknowledge that these events don’t happen without a huge amount of collaboration and community support. I would like to thank the Campbell River community sponsors of 100.7 Raven FM, Associated Tire, the Rotary Club of Campbell River, Campbell River London Drugs, Campbell River Save-On-Foods, Campbell River Shoppers Drug Mart, Campbell River Thrifty Foods, once again RE/MAX Check Realty and the city of Campbell River for bringing lots of smiles to a lot of little faces.

A big shout-out to the Downtown Campbell River BIA executive director Jan Wade and co-chairs Heather Gordon Murphy and Lisa Whitmore for putting it all together and handing out over 300 Easter baskets and bubbles for all the kids.

A special thanks for my grandchildren and for all the kids who participated. Sometimes we need to stop, look through the eyes of happy children, just to see the wonders that this world has.

IMPORTANCE OF WATER
AND IMPACT OF DROUGHT

S. Furstenau: I felt so distressed last weekend when I heard the news that Mexico City, with a population of 22 million people, is running out of water. I can’t begin to wrap my head around what it means when a city that size doesn’t have water. Already neighbourhoods and, of course, the poorest neighbourhoods are dealing with a chronic shortage of water and are relying on either government deliveries or private water cartels selling them water.

This is a nightmare on so many levels. After air, it is water that we rely on for our survival. We can last a minute or two without air. We can last only a few days without water, yet we do not treat it like the absolute precious life-giving force that it is. We misuse it. We waste it. We pollute it, and some treat it like a commodity, knowing that when it comes down to it, people faced with thirst will pay dearly for a sip of water.

In 2015, when I was area director in the Cowichan Valley regional district, we had a report from staff that one of our water systems in the north end of the region was precariously close to running out of water. It was May, and we were already in serious drought.

As we asked questions of staff, I started to cry. I still feel the weight that I felt that day in my chest. The drought we were in, in 2015, didn’t end. It has deepened. Yet there appears to be the most magical thinking of all that’s happening — the thinking that we can keep doing the same things and somehow arrive at different outcomes than the ones that we are getting now.

Today I feel the same absolutely devastating weight I felt in my chest in May of 2015. Water is life, and we have to care for it and value it the way we value life itself.

SCIENCE AND POLICY-MAKING

R. Russell: Science is a way of knowing. It relies on adherence to a scientific method. In short, look. Be skeptical about everything. Think. Challenge your belief in a way that others can copy. Prove yourself wrong, because you can’t ever be proven right in science. Rinse and repeat.

It is this process that is the magic of science. This process is what fuels the addiction to curiosity and to wonder of many scientists. I started my professional life trying to illuminate things through science, trying to clarify apolitical information that was important for society.

[10:30 a.m.]

I realized quickly that information wasn’t society’s rate-leavening step. We knew enough about emissions, for example, and the negative impact on our economies, social cohesion, ecological health, yet we still weren’t seeing policy created in step with the evident risks.

The real bottleneck was the people in policy-making chambers like this across the globe, not being able to effectively leverage the insights of the scientific community on behalf of the people they represent.

Wendi Zhou of the Canadian Science Policy Centre shared a thought with me yesterday, building upon this idea, saying: “It is important for the future of our society to strengthen the connections between science and policy-making.”

But science won’t tell us what to do in this place. Our role here is to take the values we champion and overlay them onto the science, onto the boundaries of uncertainty that science identifies and onto science’s expectations of the outcomes of those decisions.

From the IRPP report in 2016: “The input of science into policy should therefore be viewed not as advice on what should be done, but rather in terms of what is known, what is unknown, and how sure we are about it.”

Whether it’s crafting risk reduction policy to navigate the onslaught of climate-related disasters, defining legislation to optimize the benefits of AI or painting a clear picture of the danger of Meta’s algorithm on the health of our children, science has a great deal to offer us as policy-makers. It cannot offer solutions, but it does offer help. We just need to be ready to receive it.

In two weeks, we will have about two dozen scientists visiting these halls through the Science Meets Parliament B.C. program to help. I hope we all look forward to building those bridges together.

Speaker’s Statement

DECORUM AND BEHAVIOUR
DURING QUESTION PERIOD

The Speaker: Members, again another gentle reminder. When people are asking questions, answering the questions, please be brief so everybody has equal opportunity and so both sides have the same time in question period.

Oral Questions

DRUG DECRIMINALIZATION PROGRAM
AND ILLICIT DRUG USE IN
HEALTH CARE FACILITIES

E. Sturko: The NDP’s decriminalization policy of illicit drug use in hospitals is having devastating impacts on patients and health care staff.

Yesterday the B.C. Nurses Union confirmed that the contents of the health authority memo reflect the reality of rampant illicit drug use that’s being allowed within hospitals and is compromising safety and care. Nurses face a daily reality of drug-fueled violence, from having drug smoke purposely blown in their faces to being kicked, punched, shoved and even stabbed while bathrooms are being lit on fire.

Why is the Premier refusing to prioritize the safety of nurses and patients over the use of crystal meth, cocaine and fentanyl in hospitals?

Hon. A. Dix: The government, in all of our efforts in working with the B.C. Nurses Union, in working with the HEU, in working with the HSA, in working with communities, prioritizes the safety of our health care workers above all things.

We also recognize that many people who present in hospitals are dealing with severe health issues — some mental health, some addictions, some physical health issues — that require them to meet the very high standard of being admitted into our hospitals.

There are clear policies, as there are in Northern Health, with respect to these matters. Those clear policies are laid out in all facilities in Northern Health and in all the other health authorities.

Possession and use of controlled substances are prohibited for all clients in emergency departments, any unit where clients under the age of 18 are present, in-patient psychiatric units and in-patient withdrawal units. This is just a fact. It is absolutely prohibited to have weapons in hospitals.

Now, does it occur, just as it occurs in the community, that events take place in the hospital that are contrary to those rules? They do occur. I meet with nurses all the time on these questions.

That’s why we have taken unprecedented action, not because of the B.C. Nurses Union and because of nurses, but with them to improve access to security for all reasons in our hospital, because of the priority we give to protecting those who do the extraordinary task of helping people get well in acute care settings.

The Speaker: Member, supplemental.

[10:35 a.m.]

E. Sturko: The leaked memo couldn’t have been more clear that this government is not prioritizing the safety of health care workers. Illicit drug use is rampant in our hospitals, and it’s a direct and disturbing result of this NDP government’s decriminalization policies outlined in a health authority memo.

Under this NDP government, families face the dangers of meth, cocaine and fentanyl use in spaces as routine as the local Tim Hortons and as critical as the emergency department. Shockingly, nurses say one of the most affected areas are maternity wards, where infants are exposed to toxic substances.

Why isn’t the Premier putting the rights of patients and nurses and newborn babies to be safe in a hospital over the rights of open drug use of meth, crack cocaine and fentanyl?

Hon. A. Dix: The member talks about smoking substances in hospitals. They are prohibited — period. Does it mean that that never happens? Of course it doesn’t mean that never happens. But it is absolutely not allowed to do that. This is not anything that’s changed recently. It was true ten years ago, it was true 20 years ago, and it’s true now.

S. Bond: Nurses were listening to the minister’s answers yesterday, and they were outraged by his response. To suggest that a memo from the health authority was simply poorly worded and to dismiss the reality that nurses face every single day is nothing but shameful.

It has gotten so bad that Victoria General Hospital has been forced to install safety alarms in the maternity ward to detect toxic fentanyl smoke in the maternity ward. Imagine being a nurse in the maternity ward where a blinking light means you now scramble for a respirator to deal with toxic fumes. That’s the reality for nurses at Victoria General.

Why is the Premier prioritizing a policy that facilitates — there’s no other way to describe it — drug use, drug trafficking, possession of weapons over the rights of nurses and newborn babies to be safe from exposure to heroin, meth, crack cocaine and fentanyl?

Hon. A. Dix: It’s very straightforward. The policy is very straightforward: it’s not allowed — period.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Shhh. Members, wait. Please let the minister finish it.

Minister.

Hon. A. Dix: Hon. Speaker, the policy of Northern Health and all of the other health authorities is clear on these points, and it’s been clear for decades. You don’t smoke anything in a hospital.

That doesn’t mean that those issues don’t occur. That is why we’ve taken such significant steps, working with nurses who I’ve met with regularly on this very issue that we….

Interjection.

Hon. A. Dix: Well, the continuing narrative….

Interjection.

The Speaker: Member. Member, please.

Hon. A. Dix: You know, they ask a question that’s an extremely serious question for nurses, the ones I talk to, and they can listen to the answer. The answer is straightforward. It is absolutely not allowed.

We have added, significantly, 320 security officers to come in place to support our public health care workers at the behest and with the involvement of the HEU, of the BCNU, of the HSA, and we’re going to continue to take those steps to see that people are protected.

It’s never been allowed that you can smoke in a hospital, at least not in recent times, not since we changed views significantly on smoking some decades ago. It’s not been allowed at all. It’s not allowed now.

Northern Health has explicit policies that say it’s prohibited and that hospitals are smoke-free.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. A. Dix: The members may say that’s not the case. They have explicit policies that say it is, and I encourage them to read them.

The Speaker: Prince George–Valemount, supplemental.

[10:40 a.m.]

S. Bond: You know, the minister stands up every day and touts the fact there are security guards in hospitals. It is absolutely appalling that we are in a state where we actually have to have security guards in hospitals so that people can go to work and be safe.

It’s not just Victoria. It is not just Northern Health…

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members.

S. Bond: …it is across the province.

Robert LaBelle, a nurse of over 20 years at Shuswap Lake Hospital, wrote to the Premier a month ago. He describes walking into a bathroom to aid a patient: “I was met with thick, acrid smoke and inhaled what turned out to be fentanyl.”

He explains how this danger could easily happen to an unsuspecting grandmother visiting the hospital and highlights that illicit drug use is not only repeatedly found in hospital rooms. It is facilitated. That is from nurse Robert LaBelle.

How dare the minister callously dismiss concerns that nurses like Robert are expressing every single day in British Columbia by trying to suggest that a health authority memo was simply poorly worded?

Hon. A. Dix: The opposition now is opposed to the bringing in service of security guards, of improving their treatment, of improving security.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Shhh, Members.

Member for Surrey South.

Members will come to order.

Hon. A. Dix: We’ve had security guards in hospitals for some time. What the B.C. Nurses Union and what the Hospital Employees Union and the Health Sciences Association asked for was an upgrading of that, was a deprivatization of those services — something that the previous government, of course, pursued as a matter of policy.

We have made those changes and added 320 security guards, relational security officers, very significantly trained, in 26 acute care hospitals, and we plan to expand that. It’s not the answer to every problem, but it was specifically requested by the very nurses the member is talking about. So to be derisive about it….

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members.

Member for Surrey South, please come to order.

Hon. A. Dix: To be derisive about it is not the right approach.

What occurs if people are smoking in hospitals….

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members, please.

Please continue and conclude.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Stop it. Please.

The minister will conclude.

Hon. A. Dix: Thank you. It’s absolutely not allowed, clearly stated in health authority policies, to smoke anywhere in a hospital.

We are taking the steps to support our health care workers, to support the very nurses members of the opposition talked about, and we’re doing it by working with them.

We supported and funded SwitchBC, which is an organization that’s designed to improve those things and was heavily involved in the relation of the security model. SwitchBC needed to be created because the agencies supporting the occupational health and safety of health care workers was eliminated by the previous government.

The Speaker: Member for Prince George–Valemount, second supplemental.

S. Bond: The minister can stand in this chamber and try to twist my words all he wants, but let’s be clear. I am going to hold him accountable for the safety of nurses in British Columbia every single day.

If the minister wants to talk about clear policy, how about a memo, Minister? Here’s what it says: “Under direction from risk management and professional practice….” It is a memo.

Let me remind the minister how clearly the information is articulated. Item 4: “Patients can use substances while in a hospital in their rooms. They can either be provided with a Narcan kit or have one available.” Item 6: “We don’t restrict if they’re dropping off substances.” Item at the bottom of the list: “Ensure that patients know they do not need to hide their substances and can keep them in their belongings.” How clear is that?

[10:45 a.m.]

The minister can try to absolutely point the finger somewhere else. This is on his shoulders. It is happening in hospitals every single day. It sounds an awful lot like illicit drug use and drug trafficking to me and to nurses and to British Columbians.

Here’s the challenge. Will the minister today issue a directive to every single health authority that illicit drug use is not permitted, weapons are not allowed, and the safety of nurses and patients will be prioritized over the open use of meth, crack cocaine and fentanyl?

The Speaker: Minister of Health.

S. Bond: Here’s the memo.

Hon. A. Dix: The hon. member asked a serious question and starts heckling before I even speak.

I take these issues very seriously, because I meet with nurses and health care workers, and we work together on these issues. Weapons are never, are not allowed…

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members.

Hon. A. Dix: ….cannot be allowed, will not be allowed in hospitals — period. That is health authority policy.

Interjections.

Hon. A. Dix: It is clarified. There’s a health authority policy. I’ll happily share it with the hon. member. It is clear.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members.

Minister, please continue.

Hon. A. Dix: It is absolutely not allowed. We do not…. We work with our health care workers, because there are, as the members know, a growing number…

I take this issue unbelievably seriously. We work with nurses and health sciences professionals and health care workers every day on these issues. When people enter our hospitals, they enter, often, with very significant health care conditions. It’s our job….

For example, at St. Paul’s Hospital, it’s absolutely true that there is harm reduction on site because of the very specific conditions of that hospital.

The Speaker: Thank you.

Hon. A. Dix: We support nurses and support health care workers every day.

This is an attempt to ignore the policies that health authorities have that are clear and straightforward. I don’t need to issue any….

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members. Members, the question was very clear. Now let’s hear the answer.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Please. We don’t have to repeat the question, member.

Minister, conclude please.

Hon. A. Dix: When people come to hospital, we do everything we can to help them get better and to keep people safe. That will continue to be our policy every day.

OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY
PROFITS AND TAXATION

S. Furstenau: Thousands of British Columbians face impossible choices. Buy groceries or heat the house? Keep up with bills or pay rent on time? Politicians are ignoring the real causes of the cost-of-living crisis and scapegoating putting a price on carbon pollution.

One thing driving inflation is price gouging by oil and gas companies. Shell, one of the main proponents behind LNG Canada and a beneficiary of subsidies and tax credits in this province, made $28 billion in profits last year. We can’t allow CEOs and shareholders to get richer and richer from climate destruction while average British Columbians pay the price.

According to recent polling, 62 percent of Canadians say that Canada should introduce a tax on the oil and gas sector’s record profits. A windfall profit tax could help alleviate the high cost of living in B.C.

My question is to the Premier. Will his government stop giving a free ride to harmful industries and push the federal government to implement a windfall profits tax?

Hon. J. Osborne: Thank you very much to the member opposite for the question. Let me address the issue of fossil fuel subsidies that she raises.

I think the member understands that it’s been something that our government has been very focused on. For far too long, we’ve had a broken system. This government has taken extensive work to fix a very outdated oil and gas royalty system and, in fact, eliminated the largest subsidy on record, the deep-well royalty program.

[10:50 a.m.]

Going forward, we’ve taken strong action on industry like the LNG industry through our new energy action framework, putting an oil and gas emissions cap in place, ensuring that all new permitted facilities are net zero by 2030. We consider that to be the way forward that balances the interests of all British Columbians, knowing we need to take strong action on climate, that we need to hold companies accountable for the emissions that they emit and that we continue to ensure that all British Columbians can take strong action on climate.

The Speaker: Leader of the Third Party, supplemental.

S. Furstenau: I’d really love it if the government would take strong action on answering the question I actually asked, so I’ll try again.

Shell took home $28 billion in profits last year.

The question I’m asking the Premier is: will he push the federal government to put a windfall profits tax in place so that these companies that are causing climate disasters and costing British Columbians enormous amounts of money will pay their fair share?

My question again is to the Premier. Will he push the federal government to put a windfall profit tax in place?

Hon. R. Kahlon: I think the member knows that most of our members on this side of the House care deeply about inequality in our society, and when we see….

Interjections.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Most members of this House. I can’t speak for the opposition, but what I can say to the member is this. The federal government has policies and reforms that they’re looking at. What we can talk to the member about is what we’re doing here in British Columbia.

What we’re doing here in British Columbia is we are making sure that those that are the wealthiest in our province pay a little bit more so that we can ensure that everyone that is struggling in our communities has a little bit more support. That is the inequality that we fight for every day — inequality in health care, inequality in housing, inequality in society overall.

We’re committed to that work. We’ve been doing that since 2017, and we’re going to continue to do that work in the years forward.

DRUG DECRIMINALIZATION PROGRAM
AND IMPACT ON COMMUNITIES

B. Banman: Under the decriminalization and safe supply policies of this NDP government, open drug dens like Vancouver’s notorious downtown East Hastings are popping up in small towns and communities across B.C. What used to be big-city problems are ravaging small communities in British Columbia as addicts are bused from Vancouver and Victoria into communities all across B.C.

As it turns out, when government takes away tax money from working families who are literally living paycheque to paycheque and uses it to buy addictive drugs for addicts, we end up with more drug users, more crime, more chaos and fewer safe streets for people and families. Who would have seen this coming, other than anyone with an ounce of common sense?

In the beautiful community of Courtenay, in the Comox Valley, Cliffe Avenue and 6th is the intersection where open drug use, chaos and crime spills out into businesses and residential streets.

My question to the NDP Premier: will you apologize to the residents of Courtenay and the Comox Valley for the NDP pro–drug use policies which have brought big-city addiction, chaos and crime into their small, safe community?

Hon. R. Kahlon: Given this member’s history of how he treats the most vulnerable people in his community, I’m not surprised by the question I heard today. This continuously dehumanizing the most vulnerable people in our society is not a new trait. It’s actually on brand for this new B.C. Conservative Party.

The suggestion that people are being loaded up on buses and moved to communities is one we’ve been hearing for a long time, but the data does not support it. The data shows that, overwhelmingly, the populations that are struggling communities are people within our communities, our loved ones. They’re the people that we grew up with, we went to school with. They are, in many cases, our kids.

The member talks about Courtenay-Comox. We have been doing a lot of work in that community. The MLA for Courtenay-Comox and I are working with mayor and council to address challenges in that community. There’s a lack of housing available. There’s a welcome centre, a shelter right now that wasn’t purpose-built, that wasn’t ideal for the community.

[10:55 a.m.]

That’s why last week we announced we’re purchasing a brand-new parcel of land. We’re building a purpose-built shelter, building affordable housing so that we can get people the supports they need, get them housed. Get them housed, get them the supports they need. That’s how you get things done — not rhetoric, dehumanizing people, but working with communities to find solutions.

That’s what we’ve been doing every single day.

The Speaker: House Leader, Fourth Party, supple­mental.

DRUG DECRIMINALIZATION PROGRAM
AND ILLICIT DRUG USE IN
HEALTH CARE FACILITIES

B. Banman: It would be nice if, once, this minister stood up and talked about detox and actually getting people to sobriety.

Yesterday we learned that this Premier’s pro–drug use policies are also harming health care workers, who are already overworked and overwhelmed, facing the worst staffing crisis our province’s health care system has ever seen. We learned that this NDP Premier is forcing health care workers to simply accept illicit drug use in hospitals, including fumes from smoking drugs, which already made one nurse sick.

To be clear, if you smoke crack in an ER in B.C., that’s fine, but if you’re behind on your jabs, you can’t work as a nurse. You get fired. The problem with this NDP government is that no one in the Premier’s office has any common sense.

My question to the Premier: does he honestly think being cared for by a B.C. nurse who hasn’t taken the jab is less safe for patients and infants than inhaling crack fumes?

Hon. A. Dix: Of course it isn’t allowed. It wouldn’t be allowed. What the hon. member said isn’t true. I don’t expect a higher standard….

Interjection.

The Speaker: Member.

Minister will continue.

Hon. A. Dix: I think on all of these questions, from the overdose public health emergency to the COVID-19 pandemic, that the member also, for reasons of his own, has raised here, we take strong, evidence-based health care policies that focus on helping people. We’re going to continue to do that. That is what our public health care system absolutely should do.

We need to treat people with addiction problems and addiction issues with health care responses. That’s what the public health care system is doing throughout, and I think to suggest otherwise is simply incorrect. To suggest that it would ever be allowed, that someone could smoke in a hospital is incorrect, and the member knows it.

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON ANTISEMITISM
AND RESPONSE TO ISSUES

S. Robinson: Imagine you’re a young adult on a university campus, perhaps living on your own for the very first time. You’re excited and mostly nervous. But early in the semester, you find yourself isolated and afraid on your campus as hundreds of your fellow students don keffiyehs and face coverings, chanting “intifada.” They wear the uniform and shout the mantra exhibited by Hamas terrorists who slaughtered, raped and kidnapped people your own age at an Israeli music festival on October 7. Imagine what that must feel like.

On February 28, the Premier was asked about a potential referendum being proposed to the UBC AMS leadership. More than 1,200 UBC students signed the petition, asking the AMS to cut all ties with Israel, including cancelling the lease for Hillel House, a safe haven for Jewish students on campus, one that has existed for over 75 years. Jewish students have felt intimidated and afraid on B.C. campuses for months, and Hillel House is a safe space for them in this very difficult time.

Mr. Speaker, I’m going to roll my two questions into one, given the time constraint.

My first question was initially for the new Minister of Post-Secondary Education, who shared with me her belief. “Government does stand up to antisemitism, absolutely.” I checked to see if the new minister had reached out to Hillel House to check on Jewish students, to hear their concerns, to identify ways government can ensure their physical, emotional and spiritual safety on campus.

I’m going to answer the question for her, because I heard this morning, again, that in fact, the minister has not reached out at all to Hillel House, two months into her role.

When the Premier was asked for his comments on the AMS proposed referendum, this is what the Premier had to say: “A small group of students, I understand, is requesting that the AMS sanction a referendum about whether or not Hillel House at UBC should be allowed to continue to exist.”

[11:00 a.m.]

He did, however, go on to say that there are a couple of ways to look at this. First is, obviously, it’s illegal on its face. “The B.C. human rights code implicates the AMS, just like it implicates all organizations.”

The Premier’s first comment is to minimize the impact by describing more than 1,200 signatures as a small group of students. Then he suggests that because it’s illegal, the Jewish students should take comfort because they can just sue the AMS.

The Premier refused to show leadership and instead passed the responsibility to the AMS when he said that “there’s an opportunity for leadership among the AMS leadership.”

Members of the Jewish community on campuses, in K-to-12 education and in the B.C. public service do not feel safe, and the Premier’s lack of direction or action exacerbates antisemitism in our province. This is why members of the Jewish community have been calling on the Premier to create a plan to address increasing and rising antisemitism in his government and in the wider society.

My question is to the Premier or anyone on the front bench who would like to answer this question. There is an opportunity for leadership for this government. When will the Premier and his government show leadership and share their plan to address antisemitism in our schools, in post-secondary education institutions and in the B.C. public service?

Hon. R. Kahlon: I thank the member for the question.

I think, first off, it’s important to say that we acknowledge the pain and fear felt by many within the Jewish community since October 7. We’ve been hearing from members from the Jewish community. I have been meeting with members of the Jewish community from my community and sharing with them and hearing from them about where we can go from this place that we are now.

Now, I know that we have taken a lot of steps. I think it’s important to acknowledge that perhaps the member feels that we haven’t done enough, but we’re committed to continue to do more on this.

I think it’s important for the public to note that since October 7, the Premier made a statement in this House calling out antisemitism and Islamophobia. On October 30, since then, Holocaust education was launched in all schools across British Columbia. On November 15, we provided security funding for religious communities and organizations. We launched a racist incident helpline. On February 16, we updated the B.C. prosecution service, and we continue to work with the community to ensure our ways.

The Premier did say in this House that we were hoping the AMS would show leadership, and then they did. Overwhelmingly they voted against that petition that was brought forward. It’s a reminder that our communities are strong.

Everyone wants to make sure that we continue to create safe, inclusive spaces. The Minister of Advanced Education has been meeting with every single university, meeting with the leadership on ensuring that they are putting in plans to make sure that everyone feels safe in their community.

The member knows that this is a challenging file. There’s a lot happening on this file. But making sure our kids are safe in school….

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members, please.

Hon. R. Kahlon: This is not a topic for heckling from the opposite side. I think this is a topic that is so important that we all should be….

Interjections.

The Speaker: Please conclude.

Hon. R. Kahlon: The member says that we…. This is what leadership is. It’s all the work we’ve been doing bringing back the anti-racism strategy, bringing a Human Rights Commissioner.

We are committed to this work. This is important. Since day one, since forming government, we have made it a priority to make sure that everyone feels safe in British Columbia. Yes, we have more work to do. We’re going to continue to do that important work.

The Speaker: Members, the Chair is willing to allow one more question as long as it’s very brief, 30 seconds, and also provided that there are no interjections when the answer is provided so we are not going way over limit.

GAS PRICES AND FUEL TAXES

T. Halford: Gas prices are expected to skyrocket to up to $2.18 a litre. The NDP have caused the highest gas prices and gas taxes in Canada, but instead of cutting taxes, the NDP have blamed gouging. They set up an expensive website to duplicate gasbuddy.com, and then they did nothing.

People don’t want taxpayer-funded websites. They want relief at the pump.

When will the Premier listen to British Columbians and cut the gas tax when it comes to gasoline?

[11:05 a.m.]

Hon. G. Heyman: We know that British Columbians are struggling with affordability. We know that part of that affordability, as well as part of their concern for their kids’ future, is about climate change.

That’s why we have a strong climate plan, and that’s why we take actions like putting $500 back in people’s pockets through the enhanced B.C. family benefit bonus this year, along with a range of other measures that support affordability by keeping fees and rates low and stable, unlike the government that sat on this side of the House before us.

[End of question period.]

Motions Without Notice

REFERRAL OF CLEANBC GO ELECTRIC
PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION PRACTICES
TO AUDITOR GENERAL REVIEW

T. Stone: I seek leave to move Motion 25, which is on the order paper in my name.

Leave granted.

P. Milobar: We canvassed this as a question at the end of question period on Tuesday, but last night at the Public Accounts Committee, we did try a similar motion.

The Speaker: Member, I am just advised that the member for Kamloops–South Thompson has to move the motion to start first. Leave has been granted.

T. Stone: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I assumed that reading the actual motion was sufficient.

I move Motion 25, which is on the order paper in my name.

[Be it resolved that pursuant to section 13, subsection (2) of the Auditor General Act, the Legislative Assembly request that the Auditor General undertake an examination of the Government of British Columbia’s CleanBC Go Electric Program, including but not limited to the Commercial Vehicle Innovation Challenge and the Advanced Research and Commercialization Program, administered by MNP LLP, with a view to examining any potential conflict of interest relating to program administrators charging success fees to successful applicants who use their advisory services.]

P. Milobar: It’s a very straightforward motion. We tried doing this at Public Accounts last night. Unfortunately, the government does have the majority on that committee. They were not willing to try to instruct the Auditor General, although it is within the mandate of Public Accounts to do just that.

Really, this is about getting to the bottom of a matter that has been raised that has very serious potential ramifications if it bears out to be accurate. The opposition has strong evidence that there is something to look into there, and the best place for that would be the Auditor General, who has the ability to dig into this as an issue of importance, to make sure that there is not any type of a kickback scheme or corruption or anything untoward going on within programs that are being funded by the province of British Columbia and adjudicated by outside parties.

That is simply the basis of this, to try to get some daylight onto what is actually happening so that people can have confidence in a program that is fully funded by carbon taxes. At a time when there’s a lot of carbon tax debate going on in the public, it’s pretty hard to keep building public support for a tax if people aren’t very confident about how those funds are being expended with any proper oversight or not.

That is the crux of the motion, and we do hope that the chamber will support it.

Hon. R. Kahlon: The member already answered the question that he’s asking. The Auditor General has the ability to look into these matters if they choose to, so we will not be supporting this motion.

S. Furstenau: I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this. I support the motion.

I think that it is really important that British Columbians can look at processes by which funds are being granted under any program in B.C., but particularly when it comes to government programming, and be assured that there is absolute transparency and absolute clarity about how these programs are being administered.

[11:10 a.m.]

Who is adjudicating the decisions, and what are the processes for the adjudicators, and how it is, in this case, that it appears to be that the adjudicator is also a body that can receive a fee, a success fee, for successful applicants for grant programs under this program.

I think it is really important for the government to come out in a very transparent way with the public and be able to demonstrate that this program is being appropriately handled; that it is being handled in a way that does not create any distrust or lack of trust for those who are applying for the program, for those who are going through the process of applying for these grants; that they can be assured that the granting process is transparent, accountable, fair and administered in a way that all British Columbians would look to it and say: “I understand that. I can see how this is being done. I can see that it’s accountable and fair.”

In this case, I think there are a lot of questions that are coming up, and I don’t think that there was a particularly clear answer given the other day when this was raised. I think that it is an appropriate question to be asking, given the importance it is to maintain public trust.

J. Rustad: I support this motion as well, going forward.

The Conservative Party of British Columbia has received evidence from numerous companies about this program, one company in particular that was told by MNP to add 20 percent on to the contract being put forward so that they could be paying a fee to MNP, who then would adjudicate the program for making decisions.

Clearly, there is a serious problem with this program. It needs to be looked into. It should be taken seriously by this government. Yes, the Auditor General has the ability to look into it themselves, but, clearly, government should be very concerned about how taxpayers’ money is being spent on this, particularly from the carbon tax.

This does need to be looked into, and I’d encourage government to reconsider its position and instruct the Auditor General to look into this so that it can clear up this matter and make sure that there isn’t anything that is going on that the government should perhaps be ashamed of, going into the election.

E. Ross: If this issue is voted down by a majority of the votes, then it becomes a partisan issue. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue. This, actually, is what this institution is supposed to stand for. We’re supposed to be open, transparent and accountable with taxpayers’ dollars and the policies, legislation and regulations that flow from taxpayers’ dollars.

There are hints that there’s corruption here, coming from a party that’s been appointed by government to distribute dollars for a clean energy plan, for a B.C. company that, fairly, wants to be subsidized by B.C. tax dollars, and they’re accusing a party of not playing fair. And 87 MLAs in this institution swore to uphold what this institution is supposed to stand for. We are not doing our job as MLAs if we allow this issue to be swept under the rug.

This has already been brought to public accounts and has been voted down. The House Leader has already said they will not support this, meaning that the majority NDP government will vote this down so we don’t even get to uncover what’s really happening at the lower levels of this.

The opposition is trying to do our job. We’re trying to hold the government accountable. More importantly, we’re trying to uphold what this institution is supposed to be here for. We’re supposed to uphold 87 ridings’ interests and the interests of British Columbians, and as a province. The reputation of the B.C. Legislature is at stake here as well. It’s not just government.

What are we doing here if we’re not actually doing what the people elect us to do? It’s going to be a shame if this issue is swept under the rug and this is voted down by a majority government, simply for politics.

[11:15 a.m.]

A. Olsen: I am going to stand and ask that the government reconsider, retract whatever statements need to be retracted, and just vote in favour of this motion. The reality of it is that there is pretty overwhelming evidence that there’s something that needs to be looked at. Let’s look at it. If the government is so certain that it isn’t what it is, then this will all pass.

I think to have members from government talking about this being political theatre…. This is the work of government. They remember when they were in opposition. This is exactly the work that they did when they were in opposition.

This is exactly the work of opposition: to critique government programs and to ensure that they’re being delivered fairly, to ensure that there aren’t corporations and business and other entities that are unfairly benefiting from government programs, unreasonably benefiting from government programs, being in a position not only to take in the applications but also to adjudicate the applications, and then reaching out and saying: “Hey, we’ll prepare the applications for you, at a fee.”

That seems to be smoke, and you know what they say: where there’s smoke, there’s fire. I think that there is an opportunity here for government to reverse the decision that they made, to open this up, to have a look at it and to prove to us that the smoke is just smoke and that maybe there is no fire.

B. Banman: I, too, would also encourage the government to rethink its position on this. We do have a duty to ensure that taxpayer dollars are being appropriately spent. If this government chooses to not have the Auditor General look into this particular case, what it says to the voters is that they have something to hide.

Because a third party is inappropriately, allegedly, taking advantage of a system, it does not necessarily mean that the government is complicit, so a wise government that does have nothing to hide would open it up and allow the Auditor General to do the job that should be demanded by the public. Failure to direct him to do that, failure to have this investigated by an independent party, I think, is a travesty of the system that we have actually put in place. It becomes very partisan.

The taxpayers want to know that their money is being spent appropriately. It’s as simple as that. There should be nothing to hide.

T. Stone: Well, I think we’ve heard some very good points, as a number of members across the entire opposition parties have intervened and expressed, I think, some very valid reasons as to why the government has a choice that they need to make here.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members. Members, please.

Let’s hear one member at a time.

T. Stone: The reality is this. Over a number of months now, the official opposition caucus has been in receipt of phone calls, emails. We have had face-to-face meetings with individuals, with companies that have been actively engaged in the grant program in question and that have come forward and have made some very serious accusations and expressed some very significant reservations about the nature of this program, in terms of its adjudication and related success fees that are provided to the adjudicator, MNP LLP.

Now, the opposition is not saying that these are anything more than allegations, but what we are saying is that this is exactly what the role of the Auditor General should be all about and is all about.

[11:20 a.m.]

There is an opportunity here for the government to do the right thing, pursuant to subsection 13(2) of the Auditor General Act, to direct the Auditor General to conduct an audit looking into this matter.

Now, this is not a gotcha moment from the opposition. We asked questions of the Minister of Energy and Mines earlier this week about this exact matter. The minister skated right past it, didn’t acknowledge it at all and gave an answer to a totally different topic.

As part of our role, as the official opposition, on the Public Accounts Committee…. Last evening the member for Fraser-Nicola and the member for Kamloops–North Thompson brought forward a motion, specifically brought forward by the member for Fraser-Nicola, very similar to this one here today, to the members on the Public Accounts Committee. It also has the statutory ability to direct the Auditor General to look into this matter.

The NDP members, the government majority on that committee, said no. The only other opportunity…. The last chance or final effort to provide an opportunity for the government to do the right thing here is pursuant to the motion that I have brought forward today. This would require the Auditor General to look into this matter.

Requiring 20 percent success fees on grants, success fees to the company that’s actually doing the adjudication, if true, is wrong on so many levels. That practice, if it is happening, needs to stop. The only way that British Columbians will know is if there’s an audit and an investigation into this. That’s the role of the Auditor General. Today the government members have the opportunity to do the right thing.

I would point out one final piece, so as not to forget to enter this into the record. Some of the individuals that we have met with and who have expressed concerns met with staff members of the office of the Minister of Energy and Mines about a month ago and expressed exactly these concerns.

They walked the minister’s staff through what they were being told they needed to do to have a higher degree of possibility of success in receiving the grants from this program, meaning: “Pay the 20 percent. Agree to the 20 percent success fee, or you’re likely not going to have an opportunity to receive the grant.” That was brought forward to the staff or the Minister of Energy and Mines. That is a fact.

This is not, in any way, scurrilous. This isn’t, in any way, rumours. These are actual companies, actual people, that have been trying to do the right thing. They have tried to reach out to the minister. They have met with the minister’s staff. They’ve expressed these concerns. They were, essentially, patted on the head: “Thank you for coming forward.” Nothing has changed. Then we have had subsequent examples brought forward to us from other individuals.

In summary, I would hope that the government, in hearing, frankly, interventions from all opposition parties, would change its mind here, depart from the position that the Government House Leader entered into the record moments ago, and agree to this motion to direct the Auditor General to look into this.

It’s to get the answers, to dig into it, to make sure — if there is anything inappropriate happening, if there is anything corrupt happening, if there is anything that is impugning the ability of private individuals and companies from accessing grants due to success-fee requirements, and so forth — that that information is brought to the light of day, that the windows are thrown open, that air is allowed in and that changes be made as required.

[11:25 a.m.]

Again, we urge the government to support this motion, to support the transparency, the accountability, the fairness that must exist in all grant programs — particularly in the grant programs that are at the centre of what, we believe, is potentially some significant corruption and that, certainly, stinks to high heaven. British Columbians deserve to know what is going on here.

The Speaker: Minister of Energy, Mines.

Hon. J. Osborne: Thank you very much, hon. Speaker.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Sorry, Minister. The member has al­ready concluded the debate because I didn’t recognize you earlier.

The motion is moved by the Opposition House Leader, which was on Votes and Proceedings, not on the order paper, just so we’re clear.

Division has been called.

[11:30 a.m. - 11:35 a.m.]

Motion negatived on the following division:

YEAS — 27
Doerkson	Milobar	Stone
Bond	Halford	Ross
Oakes	Bernier	Paton
Davies	Furstenau	Olsen
Rustad	Banman	Kyllo
Shypitka	Sturko	Merrifield
Wat	Lee	Stewart
Clovechok	Ashton	Sturdy
Letnick	Tegart	Walker
NAYS — 46
Chandra Herbert	A. Singh	Babchuk
Coulter	Lore	Beare
Kang	Heyman	Osborne
Cullen	Bains	Malcolmson
Bailey	Mercier	Brar
Russell	Routledge	Starchuk
Rice	Yao	Leonard
R. Singh	Whiteside	Farnworth
Kahlon	Conroy	Sharma
Dix	Fleming	Dean
Rankin	Alexis	Sims
Paddon	Elmore	Glumac
Routley	D’Eith	Donnelly
Greene	Anderson	Chant
Sandhu	Dykeman	Begg
	Chen

[11:40 a.m.]

Point of Order

Hon. R. Kahlon: I want to rise on a point of order. The member for Columbia River–Revelstoke actually voted nay.

Interjections.

D. Clovechok: No, no. That member did not vote nay. He voted yea, which should have been aye.

Good try, though.

The Speaker: They were heard as yea.

Thank you, Member. It’s okay.